Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to be unbelievably annoyed by this twatting report??? May be upsetting!

263 replies

loudandproud · 09/10/2008 16:43

I have been doing some reading up on the James Bulger case recently for a project we have been doing.

It's such a horrid case my heart really does go out to his family and friends.

But whilst trawling the many many stories and articles about it, I have found one that seems to be all in the anuimals who killed hims favour. It seems to be a case of well they were abused so yes thats what abused children do.

NO IT'S NOT! I worked with abused children for a while and never once have I heard any child or anyone working alongside saying they knew a child who had done something anything like this.

That poor child was tortured and left like a piece of meat to be cut in half by a train at 2Years old, but thats okayt becaus ethe killers were abused, I don't think so.

I do apologise if I am offending anyone by saying this but they lost the right to breath the day they did this perhaps they should have been put in a cell with a big tough cell mate see how they like being tortured, terrified and abused by someone who should know better.

ARGH am so sorry but had to vent.

OP posts:
branflake81 · 09/10/2008 16:45

I think YABU.

Yes, what they did was wrong but they were children, ffs. 10 year old kids. You can't punish them in the same way as you would an adult.

They have done their time. I don't understand why they are always villified so much more than other killers.

SmugColditz · 09/10/2008 16:47

This should be in "In the news", thanks. I do not want to read about Jamie Bulger.

Although I will add that you so clearly don't have a 10 year old.

Cappuccino · 09/10/2008 16:47

your sentence beginning with "That poor child..." I don't think should be on the internet

this is someone's child you are talking about, however incensed you are

hatrick · 09/10/2008 16:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Rhubarb · 09/10/2008 16:47

Because the case was so shocking. It went beyond what most people can comprehend. I know some of the details as I studied it for criminology. I still have nightmares if I think about it too much.

What they did to that little boy does not bear thinking about. 10 years old or not, it was unspeakable cruelty.

dingdong05 · 09/10/2008 16:48

but surely it didn't say it was "ok" for them to have done that? There are always people who look for explanations when something staggering like this happens...maybe that's what they're trying to do? Find reasons rather than excusing them?

branflake81 · 09/10/2008 16:48

PS - this is a very good book to read if you're interested

www.amazon.co.uk/As-If-Blake-Morrison/dp/1862070458

hatrick · 09/10/2008 16:48

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Rhubarb · 09/10/2008 16:52

I think it's best to just leave it now. Nothing will bring him back and I hope to goodness that those boys are being monitored, because something evil was in their minds when they did that and I wouldn't be too sure that the evil would never come back.

They had no comprehension of what they had done. They wondered what all the fuss was about. They really didn't think it was all that bad.

I'm afraid that if a child is like that at 10, you've lost that child.

KerryMumchingOnEyeballs · 09/10/2008 16:53

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MinkyBorage · 09/10/2008 16:59

Wrong topic, I think it's offensive to put it here, this is CHAT!! This is NOT a chat. I don't want to read about this thanks.
Why have you namechanged (?) for this post?

Rhubarb · 09/10/2008 17:01

She did put up a warning to be fair.

You can be born psychotic. Some people live quite happily with the condition. Others are made so by their childhoods. Once you are psychotic I'm not sure if it can ever be reversed.

stleger · 09/10/2008 17:04

At the time I remember reading that certain individuals will behave more violently as a pair than alone. So the pair of boys, acting alone, might have been 'bad' but when they got together their behaviour was worse. (If that makes sense). Like the Moors Murders. My ds was a baby when the James Bulger murder happened, every time I saw the video in the shopping centre I wished I could rewind time.

beanieb · 09/10/2008 17:05

The killers of Jams Bulger have now been released after serving the time they were given. I think your anger is now misplaced and late TBH.

Children (And indeed people) who have bad things happen to them can then do bad things to other people. The two boys who killed James Bulger appear to have had difficult childhoods and to have been parented badly.

I am very surprised that you have worked with victims of abuse and not seen how damaging childhoods can effect the way a person behaves. Presumably your work with victims of abuse was not lengthy nor particularly involved.

tiredemma · 09/10/2008 17:05

They were seriously disturbed children (especially Thompson).

I dont think anyone condones their behaviour, not at all.

beanieb · 09/10/2008 17:06

PS - what was this project for? Are you by chance going into any kind of social work field? If you are then I think you might have chosen the wrong career.

fabsmum · 09/10/2008 17:06

YABU

Nobody is saying that the abuse they suffered as children justifies or excuses their cruelty, but it does help EXPLAIN it.

This case was so, so appalling, but it's not unprecedented for children to engage in terrible acts of murder and torture: large numbers of children have been involved in atrocities in war situations.

I personally think that given the 'right' conditions almost every one of us is capable of acts of extreme cruelty, otherwise how can you explain centuries of genocide in every continent on the planet?

tiredemma · 09/10/2008 17:07

And I agree with beanieb. If you work with abused children, you should know better.

KerryMumchingOnEyeballs · 09/10/2008 17:08

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

soon2be3 · 09/10/2008 17:09

I used to believe no child was born "evil" but having worked as a nursery assistant for all of 6 months (I could not hack it - there, I admit it), that belief was severely tested.

I do believe that children can show 'disturbed' tendencies from about 2 years old - and I don't mean the usual punching, pushing, biting, scratching, hitting.

I personally witnessed a 3 year old purposefully and intently push an 20 months old down the stairs. When I asked the 3 year old why he did it, in an attempt to explain why it was wrong, he answered "because I want him to hurt". This was not the only 'incident' concerning this 3 year old. He had a fondness for sticking (as in poking) things into body parts, and not only his own.

Fortunately, the 20 month old is alright - he is now 6 years old - but those 6 months really open my eyes. Nevertheless, I don't want to start upon another old chestnut arguement so I'll stop here.

Saturn74 · 09/10/2008 17:14

"I used to believe no child was born "evil" but having worked as a nursery assistant for all of 6 months (I could not hack it - there, I admit it), that belief was severely tested".

Young children may have behavioural difficulties for many different reasons. They are not evil.

fabsmum · 09/10/2008 17:18

It makes me sad that someone can witness aggressive, sneaky behaviour in a three year old and jump to the conclusion that the child might have been born 'evil'.

The way a child is treated in the first few weeks and months of life can have a profound effect on the way that they relate to others, so you are going to witness disturbed behaviour in some children. Doesn't mean they're 'evil'!

fabsmum · 09/10/2008 17:18

It makes me sad that someone can witness aggressive, sneaky behaviour in a three year old and jump to the conclusion that the child might have been born 'evil'.

The way a child is treated in the first few weeks and months of life can have a profound effect on the way that they relate to others, so you are going to witness disturbed behaviour in some children. Doesn't mean they're 'evil'!

beanieb · 09/10/2008 17:22

I absolutely do not believe in the concept of being born evil. If a child is disturbed then it's much more likely to be medical or caused by environment, it can also be made worse by the way it is handled. labeling a small child as 'evil' is wrong in every way.

soon2be3 · 09/10/2008 17:24

This is why I keep away from this field of work. I know I am not up to it. As one of the previous post hinted, I believe this type of work requires a special type of person.

I openly admit I am not that person.

I have to say, the vast majority of children I have come across, I have liked very much, even the so-called 'naughty ones'.

However, there is a specific group of children that I simply can not cope with - like that 3 year old - which is why, despite having contemplated a career change into social work (and achieved a 'distinction' in a short course at university) I realised that I was simply not cut out for it.

I would recommend anyone to think carefully about starting any course or career in social work. The hardest part is keeping confidentiality on the most disturbing cases. Very often, those studying or working in such cases, need to 'vent' (after all, most of us are only human) but there seems no one to 'vent' to. It appears that social workers are expected to keep these feelings to themselves - something I openly admit I could not do.